Streamlining Windows XP (?)

[LP]

Does any one of any links to articles on streamlining Windows operation. Back in the days of 98, I knew exactly what programs needed to be running in order for 98 to operate. I knew how to go into the registry kill all of those nasty self-starters. etc..

With XP, I'm just not sure where to start. I look in task manager and just cringe at how many programs are running in the backgound. Mostly, it looks like the programs aren't taking up CPU power, but they are still sitting there taking up my useful memory.

I wish there was a barebones Windows not those of us would prefer to use there computer power for computing and not on fancy GUI's.

[marshmat]

Two words: Good Luck.
The System Configuration Utility (start>run, msconfig) is the place to make changes to startup options. The Service Manager (administrativetools>services) is the place to turn off background services that aren't needed. If you use Spybot-SD for adware control, its Advanced mode has a System Startup option that is really just a more powerful skin for msconfig.
40-50 processes running at idle is typical in XP, if you get into the 30s you're doing well. svchost is one of the worst offenders, often multiple copies of it run simultaneously, but unfortunately it's kind of necessary. Always-on virus scanners are another big memory hog. Google each process before removing it outright from startup, ie. search for "Windows XP svchost.exe", to get a few opinions on things....

I second that wish for a basic, stable Windows. Unfortunately Vista so far seems to be up to four times worse than XP as far as resource usage goes. Server 2003 seems to be the closest to 'stable' that Windows can be, at present....

[LP]

Sounds like a challenge. I've got 41 processes running and I've only got internet explorer turned on. This is the first link I've tracked down.

http://www.angelar.com/~jeremy/compu...treamline.html

I'm tempted to present a challenge here. How few processes can we have running and still have a stable Windows platform?

Shortly after purchasing my laptop, I did a short research into speeding up XP and basically turned off all animations associated with Windows. I'm sure it freed up some processor time, but I'm thinking un-needed processes effects performance most.

[marshmat]

I'm tempted to present a challenge here. How few processes can we have running and still have a stable Windows platform?

I think my personal best to date is 29.... that's on a pretty no-frills workstation though, all number-cruncher with almost no audio, non-OpenGL graphics card, and only as much software as absolutely needed. Idle on my usual machine is around 40. I like it clean, leaves more space for when a boat model wants 400 MB to play with.
The challenge is set: Make a stable, fully operational WinXP SP2 machine run correctly with minimum resource wasteage. What shall we set as the initial target? 25 processes at idle? 30? Let's see how far we can go....
addendum- I do of course still have Symantec Corporate Antivirus running as is required on the network here... kill it (or whatever virus scanner you use) and you lose another 3-5 processes, but at the cost of possibly screwing up everything for good

[Jeff]

I do of course still have Symantec Corporate Antivirus

I would wager that consumes more resources and contributes more to a machine's slowness than every other process you can possibly kill on your XP machine combined.

[marshmat]

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly on that point, Jeff (it uses 10meg typ, peaks over 40). But ITServices doesn't exactly appreciate users who turn it off.... university networks are well secured against outside threats, but any laptop with a virus can wreak havoc within the intranet. So it has to stay, for now.

[bicarbon]

XP runs fine on 16 services
and its possible to go much lower
nod32 is low overhead vir app